A Cultural Examination of the Russian Federation Essay

Mankind has always aspired to be the largest, biggest, strongest, highest, essentially the best in everything. This is not untrue for the Russians who have had the largest country in the world for quite some time now. Russia covers one-sixth of the entire world’s land mass and has had a significant part in modern history. However, in order to understand why a country has become what it is now, one must look at its culture. A country’s culture not only reflects its citizens now but also its history and future.

In a burgeoning climate of autocracy, the Romanov dynasty was firmly established in the societal framework of early 20th-century Russia. Having been in varying degrees of absolute political control over an approximate time period of four hundred years, their eventual undoing marked a power shift polarising the imperial regime laid out by countless Tsars beforehand. Nicholas II, the last Emperor of Russia, is recognised to have a degree of personal responsibility for the downfall of the Romanovs, yet the extent to which his decision-making skills can be held accountable is questioned by some historians. Despite this, multiple political, social, and military facets of Nicholas II’s reign were handled with instability, and his perceived lack of legitimacy due to this poor decision-making ultimately was a major causative factor to the downfall of his family’s vast dynasty.

In The Reforming Tsar: The Redefinition of Autocratic Duty in Eighteenth  Century Russia, Cynthia Whittaker argues that depending on the historical, cultural and contextual period, there can be demarcated two types, both distinctive and contrasting, of Russian sovereigns, namely the “good tsar” and the “reforming tsar”. The scholar juxtaposes the two models of monarchs against the backdrop of “medieval” versus “modern” type of governance. According to it the “good tsar” typology, which is typical for the earlier Muscovy realm, defines the ruler as pious and inert, characterized by its liturgical form and static nature of the rule. The “good tsar” is bound to uphold Orthodoxy, preserve and control public order, help the poor and the underdogs

The beginning of the 20th century brought radical changes to the social and political structure of autocratic Russia. It was a period of regression, reform, revolution and eradication. Eradication of a blood line that had remained in rule for over 300 years; the Romanov Dynasty. The central figure of this eradication was Tsar Nicholas II, often described as an incompetent leader, absent of the “commanding personality nor the strong character and prompt decision which are so essential to an autocratic ruler...” (Sir G. Buchman, British ambassador to Russia from 1910 in H. Seton-Watson, The

In this article Ostrowski discusses the nature of the Tsar’s power in collaboration with other Russian institutions including the boyars and church in the 16th and 17th century. Ostrowski attempts to refute the traditional use of a absolutist or autocratic framework by historians when studying Russia by proving a level of collaboration or exchange between the Tsar and the elite. This article is a helpful addition to this research paper as it will help develop my analysis of the way Orthodox Russian’s viewed and interacted with their

In this text Phillip Barbour examines the life and death of the First False Tsar Dmitri in an attempt to find his true identity. Barbour uses extensive primary sources to describe the events of Tsar Dmitri’s life, both from Russian and non-Russian sources. While Barbour is not able to conclusively identify Dmitri’s true identity he does provide a comprehensive understanding of his life. While Barbour tends to rely on outdated historiography, this text will be a good source for a general understanding of how Dmitri gained and lost power and the social, political, and cultural mechanism behind his

The Global Experience. New York, 1992 “Table of Ranks, January 24, 1722,” in History 223 Class Reader, ed. Yuiry Malikov (SUNY College at Oneonta, 2013) http://web-static.nypl.org/exhibitions/russia/level3.html. Accessed Nov. 8,

During the later years of the Cold War and after 1991 especially this narrative of failure began to change. Textbooks like David Saunders’ published in 1992 Russia in the Age of Reaction and Reform 1801-1881 presented students with a much more complex narrative of the reforms. He postulated that the reforms were not an isolated incident, but rather a part of the greater narrative of government reform. The Great Reforms in Saunders’ book are less noticeable as a delineation in Russian history. Saunders does not use the term “Great Reforms” until the very end of his discussion to emphasize this point. Rather reforms were orchestrated by many different parts of society that had been influencing the tsar for almost a century. These reforms were

The industrialisation and economic development sweeping through Europe was not matched in Russia, where the Tsar and the educated class, the Intelligentsia, were against the idea of industrial and other types of reform (O’Connor, 1983). The Intelligentsia had a strong influence on the government and believed their mission was to serve the masses, and lead them to political consciousness (O'Connor, 1983). This meant that the majority of Russians had no effective means of changing the direction of the

In Putin’s Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia?, Karen Dawisha relates Russian President Vladmir Putin’s rise to power. She overarchingly claims that Putin is an authoritarian leader who has obstructed and even reverted Russia’s path of democratization, citing, amongst many factors that enabled his ascension, his “interlocking web of personal connections in which he was the linchpin” (100), money-laundering to tax havens and personal projects, and the complicity of the West. With copious research, journalistic interviews, legal documents, and even sporadic informational diagrams, it is evident why her book is so popular amongst scholars and history enthusiasts. Unfortunately however, in spite of the grand yet oftentimes substantiated claims she generates, a more subtle yet noteworthy assumption is made: that the state is a protector, as Olson proffered. She employs this theoretical underpinning from the beginning, though is not representative of Putin’s actual authoritarian regime.

Russia, officially known as the Russian Federation, has a total area of 17,098,242 sq km (“The World Factbook”) and is the largest country in the world. It is about 1.8 times the size of the United States (“The World Factbook”). Most of Russia is either large stretches of plains or areas with a lot of forests and mountains, with the exception of the Siberian Tundra. It is difficult to perfectly describe Russia’s climate because of it’s large size. However, in general, the country only has two seasons, summer and winter. In the summer they have very warm, continental weather and they have very harsh winters with a lot of snow. Russia is plentiful in natural resources. They are particularly

In recent times, no one can take total power by force alone; you must offer something favorable to the people in order to obtain support. Unfortunately, there are some countries that follow a dictatorship system, which is a form of government that includes social and political power to ensure that the individual’s capability remains strong. Vladimir Putin is a contemporary dictator of Russia. His rebelliousness as a child has led him to his leadership. His cold-heartedness to his rivals and invasion towards countries has led to an opposition towards him. Vladimir Putin’s experience as a street thug led him to his leadership, which easily rose him to power: Not only has he committed crimes against humanity, but he has made groups of people and countries oppose him.

Instead, the regime programmed people with the notion of social order, with traditional attitudes to great power, superiority and history, “Orthodoxy” the primary religion of the state and military. The area where politics and civil society should have been was "purged" decreasing the rights of citizens unknowingly. “If participation were not contained, the Kremlin feared the state would lose control; if the constraints were too tight, citizens would not participate, and the state would again need a cumbersome bureaucracy to get things done” (Richter 41). Political parties, independent television channels, non governmental and public organizations, the system of elections, the courts and law-enforcement bodies as autonomous bodies

Russia’s Return as a Superpower. There are concerns that Russia may once again “reassert itself militarily” (Wood 7). After the original fall of communism in 1991, Russia seemed to be on a path to democracy. Currently the notion of a democratic Russia seems to be fading as Russia “has been centralizing more and more power in the Kremlin” (Putin 2). Regional governors, who were once elected by the people, are now being appointed by Moscow.

Russia, known by most as the Russian Federation, is a federal state in Eurasia. Russia is the largest country in the world at 17,075,200 square kilometres by surface area, covering more than one eighth of Earth 's inhabited land, and the ninth most populous, with over 146.6 million people as of end of March 2016. The European western part of the country is much more populated and urbanised than the East, with almost eight-tenths of the population living within the European region of Russia. Russia 's capital, Moscow is one of the largest cities in Europe and the world. Its ohter major urban cities include Saint Petersburg, Novosibirsk, Yekaterinburg, Nizhny Novgorod and Samara.